Sunday, April 24, 2016

This is a guest post from a well-respected writer who must remain nameless for the time being.

This started out as an essay on fallacies believed by Social Justice Warriors. Somewhere along the lines, it split into two parts.

One of the problems with Vox Day’s recent, and highly recommended, book SJWs Always Lie, is that it doesn't really define the average Social Justice Warrior. This is not, in fact, an easy task. Unlike fascists, communists or even radical Islamists, the SJWs are a collection of attitudes, rather than a genuine conspiracy. The average SJW may appear to be a decent person - he or she may even be a decent person - yet sharing the SJW attitudes or fallacies, as I call them, makes them a potential danger to human civilisation. These attitudes act as triggers. When pulled, they convert a decent person into an SJW, or, as I think of them, Social Justice Bully.

Some of my readers will say that the above statement is absurd. Bear with me a little.

The sheer irrationality of the SJWs is hard to comprehend, which works in their favour; it’s hard to get a grip on an opponent who thinks so differently from yourself. Indeed, many people view SJW ‘point-and-shriek’ assaults as being unique, even though we have seen dozens in the past few years alone. They seem to be a brand of craziness that has no explanation. But it does.

The average human being has what we may as well define as two minds, the rational and the emotional. When one of these minds is strongly involved, the other goes out the window. For example, a man might discover that one of his children is not actually his own - his wife cheated on him. He will often attack the child even though the child is the sole innocent in the affair. Or, upon discovering that her husband had a previous relationship, a wife will often go mad with rage, even though the relationship started and ended before she and her husband ever met and her husband is guilty of nothing more than keeping the relationship from her.

These are both emotional reactions, governed by the emotional mind. It matters not that a rational man is perfectly capable of adopting a child and treating him/her as his own child, it matters not that the wife is perfectly capable of understanding that her husband had no obligations towards her before they met.

As long as the emotional mind is engaged, rational thought is impossible.
This explains some of the odder political theories that still remain in the political mindset, even though they have failed spectacularly time and time again. ‘Tax the rich’ sounds good, particularly to someone who isn't rich or doesn't consider themselves to be rich; it does not, however, account for the rich moving away, evading the taxes or simply not producing as much the following year because they have to pay taxes rather than reinvesting in their businesses. Emotionally, socialism and communism sound good, so good that the emotional brain fails to grasp their flaws. No politician has ever been elected by warning people that they would have to tighten their belts and do more with less.

We see this on a personal level too. Everyone wants to be good - and be thought of as good - without giving much thought as to what ‘good’ actually is. The charge of ‘racism,’ therefore, can be used to silence debate because no one wants to be thought of as a racist, as racists are evil. Indeed, this is so pervasive in our society that the mere mention of the word ‘racist’ forces the accused to prove his innocence (and you can't prove a negative) rather than the accusers his guilt. People, therefore, will bend over backwards to avoid the charge, thus turning a blind eye to anything that remotely smacks of ‘racism’.

Or, on another level, let us suppose you are in line for a promotion. You know you have all the qualifications for the post, but your pointy-haired idiot of a boss promotes one of your co-workers instead. Rationally, you may realise that the co-worker had additional qualifications you didn't have, but emotionally you’ll be looking for a reason the boss favoured your rival over you. She’s a woman, he’s black, she’s a lesbian ... you will cling to these feelings even though they have no basis in reality, because that’s easier than admitting you simply didn’t come up to scratch.

When a SJW is triggered, his/her emotional brain takes over. Rational consideration and debate - even the ability to accept that someone may honestly disagree without being a bad person - becomes impossible. Instead, the SJW horde - as Vox Day points out - attacks its victim relentlessly, seeking to completely obliterate the target and wipe him or her out of social existence. Think of every school story you’ve ever read where someone is singled out as the sole target for the bullies and you get the idea. No one wants to be associated with a target for fear the horde will turn on them next.

The weird thing about this is that it isn't entirely an unjustified reaction. Triggers that push the emotional brain to the fore can cause a wave of strongly negative emotions. Trying to escape the cause isn't actually a bad reaction, on the face of it. But the reaction is so strong that it overwhelms any consideration one might have for the rights or feelings of others. If someone happens to be so scared of dogs that they have panic attacks every time they see one, they may push for a complete ban on dogs even though hundreds of thousands of their fellows not only love dogs, they have dogs as pets.

However, there’s a nasty catch. The average individual cannot sustain a blatant emotional reaction for very long. At some point, the person will stop emoting in panic, which will allow the logical brain to take over once again. If, however, more than one person is involved, the emotional reaction from one triggers an emotional reaction from the other, which in turn spurs the first person into a bigger reaction. This leads, eventually, to mob thinking - “a person is smart,” as Tommy Lee Jones told us in Men in Black, “but people are dumb panicky dangerous animals and you know it.”

Imagine that something bad happens to you - you get fired, perhaps. Your first reaction will be the ‘fight or flight’ response; you’ll want to tell your former boss what you think of him, you’ll want to get down on your knees and beg for mercy or you’ll want to put as much distance between yourself and your former co-workers as possible. You may not be able to think straight for hours afterwards, but once you do start thinking straight you’ll realise that things are not as bad as they seem. You are still alive and you can find a new job.

If, however, you go home before you calm down and tell your partner, or your parents, or your children, you’ll only prolong the emotional response because they will be emoting too. It will take you much longer to calm down and start thinking rationally once again.

The SJW ‘point-and-shriek’ attack pattern is designed to keep that emotional reaction going as long as possible. Ordinary people, as I noted above, cannot sustain an emotional reaction for long without outside prompting. The more people who join the attack, the longer the attack lasts; the herd stampedes its victim into the ground before enough of its members manage to assess if the victim truly deserves it.

Vox Day’s three laws of SJWs - SJWs Always Lie, SJWs Always Double Down, SJWs Always Project - fit neatly into place. SJWs lie - or, in some cases, build a mountain of untruth out of a kernel of truth - in order to galvanise the emotional reaction. They double down because they cannot risk allowing the emotional reaction to abate before its target has been destroyed (i.e. pushed into resigning, which to them is an admission of guilt.) And they project because they know, at some level, that they do not regard people as individuals ... and fear their enemies feel the same way too.

The only way to handle such an assault is to remain calm, do nothing and understand that it will eventually come to an end. However, as the target’s emotional brain is also being pushed into a ‘fight or flight’ reaction, this isn't the easiest of tasks.

Indeed, and here's a link to the Anonymous Conservative blog. He's monomaniacal in how he models the biology of this, but if you find this essay interesting, you should check out his blog and perhaps book.

"However, as the target’s emotional brain is also being pushed into a ‘fight or flight’ reaction, this isn't the easiest of tasks."

Succinctly put. This is why so many people fall and fold before SJWs and why they've been so successful. In most ordinary cases, lets take the Richard Dawkins case, had he posted that tweet and a bunch of people were offended and reacted emotionally, and Dawkins apologised, the emotional reaction on both sides would peter out faster, even if the offended party reinforced eachother emotionally.

The SJWs know what they are doing by stoking the firepits, and their hapless targets are completely unprepared for that level of organized emotional warfare, why would they be? Most of us never had to deal with that once we left the playground.

Referencing Anonymous Conservative is important here, because his body of work shows that their brains are wired differently. Not only do the SJWs go straight to the emotional response, they don't really have a path to a logical response. Also, their entire worldview is built up around this false emotional reality. They must point and shriek until their target is destroyed because anything less destroys their sense of self.

This was a good read. It also helps explain why so many SJWs are female, since roughly 75% of them are feeling-deciders and USED to thinking more/mostly emotionally. Less "brain rewiring" / mode-shift to engage insanity-mode.

I can only suggest have the emotional ones turn in on themselves, or accuse right back.

If you want to go the biology route then I think it needs to be understood when you talk about mammalian herding species they live a life of hierarchy and constant battles for place, constant never ending.

This topic could also be titled "Why conservative intellectuals are nearly useless in these days of the SJW cult."

The SJW cult initiates a pogrom, conservative intellectuals go turtle and start laying essays. All the while in the midst of the pogrom all the "normies" have is the hatreds of the SJWs on one side and the casual indifference of the "intellectuals" on the other, guess who wins.

At BUGs we produce memes that the "normies" can defend themselves with or even take the offensive with in the never ending social battles.

"The average SJW may appear to be a decent person - he or she may even be a decent person - yet sharing the SJW attitudes or fallacies, as I call them, makes them a potential danger to human civilisation."

Having grown up in a big city I have more than my fair share of experience of face to face encounters with SJW's in the wild. They are not good and decent people, they are awful broken people that delight and revel in the destruction and misery they cause. They may have a façade that appears good and decent but make the slightest scratch in that façade and you will see what really lies beneath. I agree with this essay as far as it goes but the idea that they are actually decent people is risible.

You are describing the reactions of normal people. Smart leaders, people who inspire, con men, etc. play on these emotional reactions. I did sales a number of years ago and was appalled by how emotionally vulnerable people made themselves.

All it takes is someone to harness that normal reaction and do evil with it. That is what defines an swj. You can deny or short circuit the normal course of events with knowledge, but the ones who gain power by leading these reactions simply have to be stopped. There is no there there, and a vigorous counter changes the game.

Looking at authoritarian regimes in the past you realize that the only power they had was fear. The left has power because the right scurries into holes at the slightest accusation.

For example, a man might discover that one of his children is not actually his own - his wife cheated on him. He will often attack the child even though the child is the sole innocent in the affair. Or, upon discovering that her husband had a previous relationship, a wife will often go mad with rage, even though the relationship started and ended before she and her husband ever met and her husband is guilty of nothing more than keeping the relationship from her.

Some observations from an inexperienced man, so take it for what it is worth.

The bastard child is a threat to cuckolded fathers time and resources. Time that could be spent on his legitimate children or time spent finding a wife to have legitimate children.

Furthermore, the bastard can at a later date pretend to be the cuckolded fathers' child and take the resources that he is not entitled to, not least of which is the cuckolded fathers reputation.

Bastards tend to act like their true fathers, who in this case are traitors and deceivers, as such a bastard can destroy his cuckold father's reputation quite handily.

The case of the woman perplexed me for a moment, then it occurred to me. She doesn't actually give a shit about the previous relationships. What bothers her is that he felt the need to lie. Had he said "Yeah, I was really in love with X, one true love of my life. She broke it off".

Well, that would be really bad, but she'd know what she was getting into. So she could trust him.

But if she has to find out that he got dumped by the love of his life and didn't say anything about it to her until 3 years later when her friend tells her, it means the following

1. He's weaker than she thought - what else is he lacking in?

2. He must have really been in love to hide that, does she have a competitor now? WTF is she supposed to do now?

3. Her competitor can now kick her head in on the hen pecking order. God help her if she meets that bitch in a public place and the bitch shows pity. Then she's really in trouble.

So she goes into a full blown rage because this is the only possible way to test his frame. Can he hold his frame against the mother of all shit tests? If not she has to decide if she is going to have to take charge in this relationship or get rid of him.

"Rationally, you may realise that the co-worker had additional qualifications you didn't have, but emotionally you’ll be looking for a reason the boss favoured your rival over you. She’s a woman, he’s black, she’s a lesbian ... you will cling to these feelings even though they have no basis in reality, because that’s easier than admitting you simply didn’t come up to scratch."

That's not entirely true. ALOT of times being in one of those protected classes is THE reason they were promoted. They had no "additional qualifications" to speak of. It's just how leftists/SJWs infested organizations operate.

Coping with difficult people explored some variations - you can see SJWs in the sniper, complainer, sherman tank, and bulldozer, and exploder.moreThe thing is, these bad behaviors work. Like the toddler that has a tantrum, it is often easier to give in to stop the tantrum than to address the core problem. But when you reward something, you get more.Virtue signaling, accusations, the accolades when you have burned your first witch, the opponents getting out of your way. This has been self reinforcing for a long while.But now it doesn't work, at least not as much, particularly when the incidents are expose the SJW as irrational or stupid.

interlocuterThe only way to handle such an assault is to remain calm, do nothing and understand that it will eventually come to an end.

this proscription directly contradicts what he said earlier:"the herd stampedes its victim into the ground"

perhaps he assumes that 'job loss' is the worst of the possible outcomes? and that jobs are replaceable?

if so, that is woefully childish thinking and historically pig ignorant:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RQVSHfuPCQ

it's not simply social destruction which is on the table. SJWs are currently demanding full professional and economic destruction as well. and they have in the past ( and will again in the future ) demanded people's lives.

1. Ann Kellett April 24, 2016 9:08 AM

we've known about AC and his work for a long time. just as he has known of Vox Day for a long time.

12. Escoffier April 24, 2016 10:11 AMI agree with this essay as far as it goes but the idea that they are actually decent people is risible.

concur.

so many are easily mislead by an affable demeanor.

what they fail to understand is that just because someone is gladhanding you with their right hand does NOT mean that they aren't eating your children or feeling up your wife with their left.

@14 - close, but the difference is if the knowledge is a priori. If the wife asked the husband if he played the field and he lied, that's fraud. If she didn't ask, it might have been rude not to be candid, but she might have wanted not to know so as to keep the infatuation.The same with a cuckold. That means the Wife committed adultery. The child is innocent, but there are millions of innocent children (who have not been aborted) and I have no duty to them as they are not my offspring. The man may decide to adopt, but it needs to be his decision, assuming the adultery isn't sufficient for a divorce.

People who live purely in emotion, who are rewarded for living purely in emotion, have no reason to do anything other than live purely in emotion. SJW’s are like some apochryphal upper crust Victorian society dame who covers the piano legs because they are suggestive while referring to them as “limbs”. The same woman in a less wealthy house, where fewer resources were available to her, would not have that option.

So SJW’s result from a combination of narcissism, seemingly unlimited resources, and zero negative feedback at the physical level. Yes, I did just sum up Anonymous Conservative’s thesis in a different way.

This article seems a bit rough to me, like a string of comments put together, it would have benefited from one more iteration of the editing process in my opinion.

20. G-S. April 24, 2016 11:25 AMHmm. OK. What if, when the logical mind takes over, discovers that the SJW is correct? What then?

how often have you been panicked into an action, considered what you did later and gone, "gosh, it sure was a good thing that i jumped without looking."

alternatively, let's stipulate to the hypothetical ...

ignore that the vast majority of point-and-shrieking is knowingly false accusations/assertions INTENDED to cause the social stampede.

when the logical mind analyses the facts at it's leisure and reaches the same conclusion as the emotional mind ... even though this conclusion is at odds with what the logical mind had concluded earlier ...

why would the logical mind NOT then acknowledge the variant conclusion as correct?

interlocutorRationally, you may realise that the co-worker had additional qualifications you didn't have, but emotionally you’ll be looking for a reason the boss favoured your rival over you. She’s a woman, he’s black, she’s a lesbian ... you will cling to these feelings even though they have no basis in reality, because that’s easier than admitting you simply didn’t come up to scratch.

does anyone else find it odd that EVERY SINGLE ONE of his "imaginary" examples is NOT imaginary, but is actually codified in law?

here's an example:down in Florida, i know of a Black Jamaican immigrant who has a fair sized earth moving company. a company which he started with SBA administration loans which he qualified for due to his status as a "minority". loans which your taxes pay for.

so, even though he has never suffered ANY discrimination at the hands of Americans, even though none of us has ever discriminated against him, you will take my tax money and provide him with a business opportunity which *i* cannot take advantage of even without government aid simply because of how much of my income is being confiscated and diverted.

but i'm the one who doesn't come up to scratch.

or what about the numerous 'minority' aid programs available to White Women? people who are neither minorities nor oppressed ( indeed, the most privileged class in America ) in any way.

If I could solicit some prayers for my stepdad, I would appreciate it. My mom just could to tell me she had to call the rescue squad for him. He's got Alzheimer's pretty bad. He was far more a better father than my biological one ever was. Thank you.

A post worthy of academic study. Sadly, the current battlefied is so skewered in favour of the marxists that it will be relegated to the fringe.

Here in Ontario, the legal profession and crown have shown disturbing trends of pursuing emotion-based cases, resulting in dismissal (with concurrent waste of tax money and eroded public confidence). Same goes for academia.

A dedicated drive of lawyers to take on the sjws, teachers to stand up to indoctrination/anti-western ideology etc is an opportunity ripe for the taking. Just need to rally the forces that are currently disjointed in the alt-right.

In his best selling book "The Chimp Paradox" Britain's eminent psychiatrist and fellow of the Royal College, Dr Steve Peters, explains;

Functional Brain Scanners are now so sensitive that we can observe the blood supply to the brain in real time! Consequently, we now know that when we are thinking calmly and rationally, the blood supply is going to the frontal (what he refers to as the Human) area of the brain and that, when we are acting irrationally and emotionally, the blood supply is going to the Limbic (what he calls the Chimp) part of the Brain. Importantly, the scanners show that the blood supply never goes to both "chimp" and "Human" parts of the brain simultaneously. Proving once and for all, that it is impossible to think rationally and emotionally at the same time.

At Scott Adam's recommendation, I've been reading "Influence" by Robert Cialdini. It's a real eye opener about how easily people can be influenced by fairly simple means. Some of the things above remind me of those tactics such as social proof. Particularly in the sense of the point and shriek tactic.

The SJW ‘point-and-shriek’ attack pattern is designed to keep that emotional reaction going as long as possible. Ordinary people, as I noted above, cannot sustain an emotional reaction for long without outside prompting.

That explains something that I had noticed during two failed SJW Point And Shriek attacks but couldn't figure out why they had collapsed at the point they did.

It was interesting to me because these Point and Shriek attacks were going perfect well at the time.

The first one we all know perfectly well.

When SJWAL was first published the SJWs reflexively when into Point and Shriek. The Hivemind is an unintelligent one. The smartest thing they could have done was ignore it completely because Vox has made himself immune to steps THREE through SIX of an SJW attack.

At that point...

...Rainbow Brite Blancmange, published it's own parody, called...This will take while have a seat...

John Scalzi Is Not A Very Popular Author And I Myself Am Quite Popular: How SJWs Always Lie About Our Comparative Popularity Levels

This book is alleged to inspire humor, the title tells you how likely it will succeed in that attempt.

The real purpose of the this book is to generate golf clap approval from the SJW Plankton Cloud. But in so doing it began to serve the function of the Political Show Trial.

John Scalzi for those blessed few among you who don't know of him, is a medium talented, mid-list author, who appears to be under the impression that if he gets enough Hugo Award nominations he will be as important in the field as Robert Heinlein.

His function in the show trial was to provide the court room setting. Scalzi announced that he was going to hold a fund raiser for some SJW Sci Fi Convention charity or another for people of color who can't go to conventions because privilege. ( I'm not joking about this). Once he reached his modest goal he was going to do a dramatic reading of; John Scalzi Is Not A Very Popular I'm not typing this again.

Scalzi has done this before. He put's himself up as the front man for some SJW charity drive. The purpose of which is to allow others to publicly disapprove of Vox Day on a collective basis by taking part in group ridicule of Vox Day. That being the Show Trial part. His dramatic reading was to function as victory parade.

Something funny happened that time. One of the Vile Faceless Minions put up a parody of the parody with an even longer title called; John Scalzi Is A Rapist: A Pretty, Pretty Girl Dreams of Her Beloved While Pondering Gender Identity, Social Justice, and Body Dysmorphia.

But the reaction is so strong that it overwhelms any consideration one might have for the rights or feelings of others.

There were way too many sentences in that post, but this is the key one. SJWs are selfish. They don't give a damn about justice, they just want attention and power and they don't care who or how many they injure to get it.

It is quite possible for an SJW to be cold and unemotional, as he goes about to destroy the perceived enemy. I've seen this in action in my own life. He could have his own rationale, or he may not have any at all. Although I do agree that the emotional mind can and often does shut down the rational (the fight or flight), there is no guarantee that the mind in a suppressed emotional state is actually rational at all. That is a peculiar phenomenon because those with regularly suppressed emotional states presuppose they are rational, but many haven't actually put the effort in to be that way. And it really doesn't come down solely to the material mind, anyway. Evil is a force. When it is a force in little people who have no power in and of themselves, they are more likely to gain power from each other and point and shriek than they are to bring out bigger weapons. This is how people's revolutions are won. Get the greed and envy going in mankind, make them believe their rights are being trampled, and they will bolster each other to mass destruction.

The case of the woman perplexed me for a moment, then it occurred to me. She doesn't actually give a shit about the previous relationships.

No, the wife is actually angry because she's jealous of the woman who existed in another plane of spacetime. That's how irrational women are. Had she found out about the ex-girlfriend when she and her future husband were on their fourth date, she would have still been jealous, but less betrayed and angry, and more motivated to out-compete the ex-girlfriend by dropping her drawers.

OP: When a SJW is triggered, his/her emotional brain takes over.

Yes, but, there is also a logical, semirational, evil, and long term pathology to them. They are not just a group of people who happen to be offended en masse.

A possible reason why SJW point-and-shriek lynch mobs can’t be sustained is the biological limits of the human limbic system. Eventually the adrenals are depleted, the shrieking outrage declines to mere crankiness. Time is needed for the system to recover.

As we’ve seen, outlasting them isn’t enough. Counterattacking is required, and ridicule is effective, doubly so if the ridicule hits one of their many emotional triggers. Because poking their buttons also stimulates the limbic system. Leading SJW’s to chew on themselves leaves less energy for them to attack others.

Also, their skim-until-offended style of reading suggests one way to entrap them into a trigger-emote-trigger loop might be to bury certain words in text. Setting them off on harmless tropes would make it even easier to ridicule them.

So use triggering words in comments, blog entries, etc. and don’t be niggardly about it.

I notice that the writer, even in an article denouncing SJWs, adopts their unique and jarringly ungrammatical form of expressing pronouns. He uses 'he and she' and 'he/she' which are awkward and sound stupid, and then uses 'their' when the antecedent is singular, which is ungrammatical and sounds stupid.He has been tricked into thinking the particular jargon or lingo the enemy uses for virtue signaling is indeed the proper way to write. It is not. Using their Newspeak conventions merely normalizes their madness and deceives unwary onlookers into thinking 'he/she' or 'they' are correct pronouns.

BTW, I'm constantly amused at right/left views are often polar opposites. The author starts out by assuring us that most SJW's "decent people" who are confused/mislead etc. This seems to be the common belief on the Right, that our enemies are just OK but wrongheaded. Meanwhile, the Left assumes everyone on the Right is either evil or a stupid, close minded bigot.

:P I one time mentioned a chimp out and a white guy thought it was a bridge too far and ask me not to use that term again with him. I thought, "Ah Grasshopper, you are not ready for your green belt yet"

One more named individual for the SJW list, and the Harvard admins could be identified and named as well:

http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/232166/

"DISPATCHES FROM THE EDUCATION APOCALYPSE: Very Special Snowflakes: Harvard Refuses to Name the Student Who Repeatedly Insulted a Visiting Former Israeli PM by Saying She Was “Smelly” and Had a “Very Smelly Odor” – and removes the exchange from video of the event. “Note the efforts Harvard Law is going to here on behalf of benevolent censorship — they’re not trying to silence this ugly cur. They’re trying to protect him. He made public statements, in a public forum, but Harvard is going hyperactive to delete his statements from the public record.”

Is it any wonder that so many of them exhibit strong symptoms of narcissism, borderline, and other cluster-B traits? All of them - emotionally immature/ damaged, and high anxiety/constantly in fear of everything.

They don't have the emotional resilience to accept "no", that things don't go the way they want.

They're terrified of being shunned / found out to be imperfect.

They'll tell you sanctimoniously "it's the wolf you feed" when calling you a hater, and while steeping themselves in constant fear and hatred.

They'll tell you "butterflies must struggle or they're crippled" while doing their utmost to create safe space cocoons.

more than my fair share of experience of face to face encounters with SJW's in the wild. They are not good and decent people

Meeting a witch girl in college that put her menstrual blood in food she cooked for her boyfriend made me weary of potlucks

does anyone else find it odd that EVERY SINGLE ONE of his "imaginary" examples is NOT imaginary, but is actually codified in law?

I see your black Jamaican immigrant and raise you the black guy that gets all the govt awarded contracts and doesn't even have a company to do the work he just subcontracted them until someone thought it was a bad system.

It is probably too late for him, but high fat, low carb diets have helped slow down the progression of the disease

According to Lew Rockwell there is nothing Serrapeptase can't do. Its even tempted me to buy a bottle of snake oil.

Serrapeptase digests inflammations, scars (non-living tissue), blood clots, cysts, arterial plaque, and inflammation in all forms.Doctors in Asia and Europe have been prescribing serrapeptase to treat various forms of inflammation for the past 30 years, yet in North America, where it is considered a supplement, is remains relatively unknown

Visiting Former Israeli PM by Saying She Was “Smelly”...UPDATE (FROM GLENN): His name is Husam El-Qoulaq."

"Meeting a witch girl in college that put her menstrual blood in food she cooked for her boyfriend made me weary of potlucks"

I'd rather watch "Lemon Party" on a repeating loop with "Barney" spliced in than have read that sentence.

FFS!!! That's almost as bad as how polio vaccines reach the poor castes in India. They give the oral vaccines to middle and upper caste pajeet because he is still a street-shitter. The rain washes the vaccinated shit and piss into the poor castes' drinking water.

It is probably too late for him, but high fat, low carb diets have helped slow down the progression of the disease.

I wouldn't assume it's too late. Nobody's run a long term trial, or one for patients with severe dementia (where's that thread on science?) but in the trials that have been done, MCT oils have improved cognitive functions in people with dementia. So we don't know, but it's possible. It looks like the brightest ray of hope out there right now.

@27 This was the case 25 yeas ago when you had a lesbian 'community activist' as AG (who then went on to recommend sharia - quite a character). Today you have another as premier. And then there is PedoEd Levy...

@45 The first time I met a prominent SJW, she was in the middle of talking about how she 'opened' her relationship on vacation. Cucky wasn't home from work yet. He reminded me of Jake Rapp, so I wonder now how he really brought home the bacon.

One SJW rampage that didn't work as expected was the case of Walter Palmer, the American dentist who shot a lion in Zimbabwe. Despite all the hysteria and threats, the guy made a brief statement at the start that he acted in good faith, then he took himself and his family out of the public eye completely. Without the presence of the victim to provide more fuel for the ragers, the whole thing sort of petered out. Eventually, he went back to his practice and nobody talks about it at all anymore.

I think this analysis misses the mark. It seems to assume that the response, though emotional and excessive, is a result of some good-faith anger in response to genuinely offensive speech or actions. But that's the sort of blue-pill thinking that has gotten so many into trouble. If it were true, then the typical response of offering a sincere apology would, for the most part, end the attack. But we've seen that the apology only acts as blood in the water that increases the feeding frenzy.

It seems to me that there are two semi-related motivations for the SJW:

(i) in-group status and virtue signaling to prove what "good thinkers" they are to other SJW types - "Look how outraged I am. I must be part of the group!"

(ii) the cathartic rush of power and self-satisfaction they feel when they claim a scalp from somebody perceived to be in the "out-group" (i.e., a "bad thinker") and force people to obey their behavioral and thought requirements.

Taking offense at seemingly inoffensive things is something they've conditioned themselves to do in order to achieve some combination of (i) and/or (ii).

In current events, as new sjw antics and issues arise to document, analyze, marvel at (I tend to marvel, listen, take a lesson from it, anything, sometimes the antics are henhousey, evil, etc.) and remain objective. It is like being a doctor listening to someone with problems which could be a projection on my part.

It is just that as the mil len's keep talking and the boomers keep boominghumor its alot of sjw noteworthy content.

Personally, it took 6 months to a year to finally understand the full spectrum of what I can survive and move on from. The damage they inflict often invokes the henhouse, fights, disagreements, all that nullsense yet it proves more educational and less hurtful in a short amount of time.